E-mail List Archives
Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files
From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Jan 28, 2009 4:45PM
- Next message: Chris Hoffman: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- Previous message: Randy Pearson: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- Next message in Thread: Chris Hoffman: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- Previous message in Thread: Randy Pearson: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- View all messages in this Thread
Cliff asked:
How about "signed copy" (or "as submitted," if it's something your agency received) and "accessible version"?
Randy responded:
Good idea. We're already en route to establishing file naming conventions, wherein one can (hopefully) grok something from the names (e.g., one might have an extra "_text" appended to the stem of the name). But your idea sounds like a good one. Perhaps add a "notes" column to the right that includes this. In fact that could provide an avenue to point to the other
file also.
Now Cliff adds:
If you follow that route, might I suggest that you put the accessible file *first* and refer to the official, signed copy in the note? That way everyone who needs the accessible version (presumably including people using PDAs) can get to the information as quickly as possible. The "Date" column could still show the date associated with the original document. Its heading could be something like "Date Signed," for example.
>>> "Randy Pearson" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > 1/28/2009 4:12 PM >>>
>> If it's a page that lists many such files, how about a properly
>> marked up table, with the two versions in separate columns?
We started down that path, but then didn't like it. Hence pausing for this
post. ;) What we did not like was the table might already have 4 columns to
include date, size, type, name. If you added the accessible version to the
same row, then really you need 4 similar columns, as date, size, type apply
separately to those files also. That approach felt both structurally and
visually wrong.
>> How about "signed copy" (or "as submitted," if it's something
>> your agency received) and "accessible version"?
Good idea. We're already en route to establishing file naming conventions,
wherein one can (hopefully) grok something from the names (e.g., one might
have an extra "_text" appended to the stem of the name). But your idea
sounds like a good one. Perhaps add a "notes" column to the right that
includes this. In fact that could provide an avenue to point to the other
file also.
-- Randy
- Next message: Chris Hoffman: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- Previous message: Randy Pearson: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- Next message in Thread: Chris Hoffman: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- Previous message in Thread: Randy Pearson: "Re: Semantics for Indicating Accessible Version of Files"
- View all messages in this Thread